1 Topic by onionworld (edited by onionworld 2005-09-27 13:19:18)

  • Registered: 2005-09-22

Topic: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

I've heard David Icke say that "they" don't care which religion you choose, "they" only care that you choose one because when you choose a religion, you limit your view of reality to whatever reality that  religion teaches. I'm paraphrasing but this is the main idea. How can David Icke teach this and then claim "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion"? Talk about a limited perspective on reality! Can you imagine if you met someone and you asked them to explain their belief system to you and they said, ""Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion." I would run from that person. It sounds like something a lunatic would say. I realize that the sentence is an oversimplification of what Icke really wants to say, but, I think that the statement and what it entails boxes people in and is more dogmatic than any religion I can think of. Any thoughts?

  • From: Zion
  • Registered: 2004-09-28

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Hi onionworld,

Before I give you my thoughts on this, can you please provide me with your definition of the concept of "Infinite Love" as you understand it?

"Fear is the great barrier to human growth. Unknowns create fears. When these Unknowns become Knowns the fears diminish and disappear, and we are able to cope with whatever confronts us." - Robert A. Monroe

3 Reply by onionworld (edited by onionworld 2005-09-27 20:38:10)

  • Registered: 2005-09-22

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Neomatrix wrote:

Hi onionworld,

Before I give you my thoughts on this, can you please provide me with your definition of the concept of "Infinite Love" as you understand it?

Hi Neomatrix,

I don't see why it matters because the point I'm trying to make has nothing to do with my personal belief system.

I heard David Icke explain his concept of infinite love in an interview. He said "infinite love" means infinite love, infinite intelligence, infinite everything. Even if you use Icke's definition, I find the statement "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion" to be more dogmatic than anything I've heard any religion propose.

4 Reply by impatiens

  • impatiens
  • Guest

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

onionworld wrote:
Neomatrix wrote:

Hi onionworld,

Before I give you my thoughts on this, can you please provide me with your definition of the concept of "Infinite Love" as you understand it?

Hi Neomatrix,

I don't see why it matters because the point I'm trying to make has nothing to do with my personal belief system.

I heard David Icke explain his concept of infinite love in an interview. He said "infinite love" means infinite love, infinite intelligence, infinite everything. Even if you use Icke's definition, I find the statement "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion" to be more dogmatic than anything I've heard any religion propose.

More dogmatic than the first of the 10 Commandments (from the Roman Catholic religion btw): I am the Lord, thy God, thou shalt not have strange [other] gods before me? Hmmm? That's about as dogmatic as it comes in my opinion. And this is the religion in which I was raised. Can't speak for any others.

More to the point, "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion" , sounds like a positive and healthy way to approach life/living. Also seems to me that he's saying that infinite love is all encompassing. I don't get it, what precisely is bothering you about this?

Btw, I haven't heard or read him saying this, so I'll have to take your word for it.

Bottom line for me, I have a direct connection to my Creator, and all of Creation --which to me actually do represent Infinite Love -- ergo I don't need any intermediaries or go-betweens. Though it is interesting to learn what others feel, think, believe...

Also, why did you title this thread a "contradiction" in Icke's teaching? Contradictory to what else that he's said or written?

Thanks,

  • From: The Present
  • Registered: 2005-06-19

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

I thought I'd just jump in here, not knowing exactly what is behind these teachings, but rather approach this from a different point of view.

To define literally something as 'true', in order to be true, it requires a statement to be made. If we consider knowledge to be infinite, and the learning required to attain this knowledge infinite, then the truths contained within this knowledge are infinite also. Hence, the statements made also would need to be infinite.

So the statement 'Infinite love is the only truth' can be regarded as one truth, but not all truth. Religions that are used in a positive way, and when their messages are not perverted can provide universal truths, but each by themselves do not provide ultimate truth.

Therefore the statement regarding infinite love may be true, but it is not ultimate truth.

Vincit omnia Veritas: Truth conquers all.
  • Registered: 2004-03-25

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Ah heck -- I'll jump into this too! <g>

I believe Icke published this book (about Infinite Love)  after his ayahuasca experience -- in which case, unless one has taken ayahuasca I don't think we'd have any concept "exactly" what Icke is talking about.  But, regardless -- I get the idea of what he's talking about and concur with matt_d82 ... plus, it's not a bad way to live --

David Icke to me is too out there -- doesn't resonant with me -- Queen Reptile and all -- but the infinite love stuff -- yup, that I like <g>

I know -- it's the New Age Hippie in me -- smile

Christine

7 Reply by onionworld (edited by onionworld 2005-09-28 07:45:36)

  • Registered: 2005-09-22

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

impatiens wrote:

More dogmatic than the first of the 10 Commandments (from the Roman Catholic religion btw): I am the Lord, thy God, thou shalt not have strange [other] gods before me? Hmmm? That's about as dogmatic as it comes in my opinion. And this is the religion in which I was raised. Can't speak for any others.

I don't get it, what precisely is bothering you about this?

I'm not trying to be patronizing, please bare with me.

Main Entry: dog ·mat ·ic
Pronunciation: dog-'ma-tik, däg-
Variant(s): also dog ·mat ·i ·cal /-ti-k&l/
Function: adjective
1 : characterized by or given to the use of dogmatism <a dogmatic critic>
2 : of or relating to dogma

Main Entry: dog ·ma ·tism
Pronunciation: 'dog-m&-"ti-z&m, 'däg-
Function: noun
1 : positiveness in assertion of opinion especially when unwarranted or arrogant
2 : a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises

Yes, Icke's saying is more dogmatic than the ten commandments.

Main Entry: com ·mand ·ment
Pronunciation: k&-'man(d)-m&nt
Function: noun
1 : the act or power of commanding
2 : something that is commanded; especially : one of the biblical Ten Commandments

IMHO, commandments aren't dogmatic at all, by the definitions of the words.

The thing that bothers me is that Icke appears to be doing the very thing he's teaching against, setting up a dogmatic belief system that will limit people's view of reality!

Definitions from http://www.merriamwebster.com/

8 Reply by montalk (edited by montalk 2005-09-28 10:23:57)

  • montalk
  • montalk
  • forum-keeper-upper
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2004-03-24

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Can you think of examples where "infinite love is the only truth, everything else is illusion" limits one's view of reality?

Such a statement is more supportive of freewill and the expansion of knowledge than, say, the Ten Commandments which are ten algorithms to instill programmed morality in masses that lack conscience.

Or better yet, what if Icke had said, "Limiting your view of reality always leads to ignorance" and printed that statement on books, t-shirts, made his followers recite it, etc... then perhaps to you it would have all the superficial appearance of dogma despite its content saying exactly what you think is a good idea. The point is, superficialities aside, what is wrong with the meaning/content/understanding of "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is illusion"?

Acquiring fringe knowledge is like digging for diamonds in a mine field.

montalk's Website

  • Registered: 2004-03-25

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Yeah." Some people want to fill the world with silly love songs. What's wrong with that? I'd like to know..." lol

10 Reply by RonD (edited by RonD 2005-09-28 11:38:18)

  • RonD
  • Guest

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

It seems to me that the essence of "Infinite love" even encompasses the need to create, or participate in any illusion.  Until it serves no purpose.

Truth is being revealed as illusions transform.

The phrase "Infinite love is the only truth, everything is else is an illusion," places "Infinite Love" in an exclusive position.  It is a cute play of semantics and has beautiful meaning.  Sends a kind of electric charge.  Like a story needs conflict to resolve. 

Still, maybe "Infinite love" ensures through trail-and-error in our lifecycles that we create illusions filled with more and more love.  If we are conscious and aware we can expand our view in our lifetime.  For those with limited views after their life review.  So aren't illusions just creative toys for the unfolding "Infinite love."       

David Icky is a very fascinating character.  He surfaces great truth through dramatic dynamics.  I recommend his videos, website and may read his books at some point.   He is rarely boring. 

Dr. David Burns in his book "Feeling Good" lists 10 ways people distort thoughts and language:  Black and white, All or Nothing, using should etc.  Practicing his list helps bring clarity to thought.  But using them can restrict the impact of a message. 

I like your phrase montalk also.  You are very creative, and offer an important service to humanity.  Glad to have found NR.

Love songs are another great expression of infinite love.

So what is outside of "Infinite Love" anyway?  Are illusions?

  • Registered: 2005-06-26

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Well, I'd say there's nothing outside infinite love, and illusions are an expression of it.

But that's not news big_smile

"The most important decision you have to make is whether you live in a hostile or friendly universe."
~ Albert Einstein

The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes. ~Marcel Proust

The evolution of humanity is an evolution of the heart. The path is through the heart.
  • Registered: 2005-09-22

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

This is my feeing: David Icke has created an oppo-same to religion. I've explained myself as well as I can. Opinions are like noses, everybody has one. Take it for what it is.

13 Reply by Ian

  • Ian
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Ottawa, CAN/Sydney, AUS
  • Registered: 2005-06-21

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

David Icke has one clear difference from religion that I feel shows he is not trying to create followers or trap people like religion is. I am assuming this is your line of argument, otherwise it is purely semantic like your dictionary post lets one and if that's the case, there's no progress in understanding to be made. The difference is he is trying to get people to remove their dependence on external, false connections to God through middlemen and empty ritual and symbol. Instead he encourages finding your own why out of the system and clearly promotes individuality, diversity, independent thought and experience. Finally, he recommends people question all material and sources and that they make sure it rings true with them. This applies to his material, so I say it is a pretty solid case for it not being an oppo-same to religion.

Remember that you take what rings true and leave the rest. If warning bells come on when you think of David Icke, then acknowledge them and proceed cautiously. There is always potential for misinterpretation and self-indoctrination.

  • From: Zion
  • Registered: 2004-09-28

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

onionworld wrote:

I heard David Icke explain his concept of infinite love in an interview. He said "infinite love" means infinite love, infinite intelligence, infinite everything. Even if you use Icke's definition, I find the statement "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion" to be more dogmatic than anything I've heard any religion propose.

So, basically Icke is saying that infinite consciousness/intelligence is the only thing that exists, and that everything else is merely an illusion created by that intelligence. Okay, well... how is that dogmatic based on the definition you posted? Sure, he's making a statement. But I find nothing particularly unwarranted, arrogant or assertive about it. Still, I understand your point, however. Icke has often been heard to say that he isn't interested in creating another religion or having any 'followers', and that he doesn't really care what other people choose to believe. But, I have sometimes noticed him becoming very exasperated when defending his beliefs to someone who isn't particularly open to them. Something doesn't quite add up there, but still - he's only human. He can believe whatever the hell he wants to believe. If people choose to accept his ideas, without first finding their own subjective evidence to convert those beliefs into knowns, then yes - they are simply creating another belief system/religion. Whether or not that is David's true intention - regardless of his stated denial of such - is known only to him.

"Fear is the great barrier to human growth. Unknowns create fears. When these Unknowns become Knowns the fears diminish and disappear, and we are able to cope with whatever confronts us." - Robert A. Monroe

15 Reply by onionworld (edited by onionworld 2005-09-28 20:31:28)

  • Registered: 2005-09-22

Re: Contradiction in David Icke's teaching?

Ian wrote:

David Icke has one clear difference from religion that I feel shows he is not trying to create followers or trap people like religion is. I am assuming this is your line of argument, otherwise it is purely semantic like your dictionary post lets one and if that's the case, there's no progress in understanding to be made. The difference is he is trying to get people to remove their dependence on external, false connections to God through middlemen and empty ritual and symbol. Instead he encourages finding your own why out of the system and clearly promotes individuality, diversity, independent thought and experience. Finally, he recommends people question all material and sources and that they make sure it rings true with them. This applies to his material, so I say it is a pretty solid case for it not being an oppo-same to religion.

Remember that you take what rings true and leave the rest. If warning bells come on when you think of David Icke, then acknowledge them and proceed cautiously. There is always potential for misinterpretation and self-indoctrination.

Neomatrix wrote:
onionworld wrote:

I heard David Icke explain his concept of infinite love in an interview. He said "infinite love" means infinite love, infinite intelligence, infinite everything. Even if you use Icke's definition, I find the statement "Infinite love is the only truth, everything else is an illusion" to be more dogmatic than anything I've heard any religion propose.

So, basically Icke is saying that infinite consciousness/intelligence is the only thing that exists, and that everything else is merely an illusion created by that intelligence. Okay, well... how is that dogmatic based on the definition you posted? Sure, he's making a statement. But I find nothing particularly unwarranted, arrogant or assertive about it. Still, I understand your point, however. Icke has often been heard to say that he isn't interested in creating another religion or having any 'followers', and that he doesn't really care what other people choose to believe. But, I have sometimes noticed him becoming very exasperated when defending his beliefs to someone who isn't particularly open to them. Something doesn't quite add up there, but still - he's only human. He can believe whatever the hell he wants to believe. If people choose to accept his ideas, without first finding their own subjective evidence to convert those beliefs into knowns, then yes - they are simply creating another belief system/religion. Whether or not that is David's true intention - regardless of his stated denial of such - is known only to him.

I agree with almost  everything both of you just said. I love David Icke, I think he's a brillant teacher and a great researcher.

I think what it comes down to is this: All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. I think Icke's teachings have reached the third stage in many respects. I think in the third stage, the "bandwagon effect" kicks in: The bandwagon effect is the observation that people often do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Once the bandwagon effect kicks in, you have a bunch of sheep following you. Sheep, by definition, can't analyze things properly. Could Icke be pandering to them by making his teachings so simple that they are becoming dogmatic? Could he be creating a religion without realizing it or visa versa? It's true, Neomatrix, only he knows if he's doing it on purpose. We can only look at the clues, but like you said Ian, take what rings true and leave the rest.